International Banking

UGB 322
Individual assignment
Weighting 100% of the marks for this module
This is an individual assignment of about - 2,500 -3000 words.
The hand in date is: 6
th
January 2014
Requirements:
This assignment is in two parts.
Each part carries equal weighting.
Part A.
Discuss why banks need to be more regulated in terms of risks they face compared
to other financial firms.
Part B.
International banks tend to operate differently in different economies to maximise
their shareholders value. Critically analyse the role international banks play in the
emerging markets compared to developed markets.
The University policy on cheating collusion and plagiarism will be applied to this
piece of work.
Guidance:
Students should approach this assignment as an academic essay, weighing the
arguments for and against each issue, making comment on the literature and
drawing logical conclusions. Referencing is a key requirement of the assignment to
demonstrate wider reading and to underpin the discussions, ensuring they have
sufficient depth.
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
Criteria Fail (<34) Fail (35-39) 3
rd
(40-49) 2:2 (50-59) 2:1 (69-69) Ist (70+)
Knowledge of relevant concepts
and issues
Fails to identify the majority of
the concepts relevant to the
question or introduces topics
that are not relevant. The
ordering of the concepts
indicates a lack of
understanding of key concepts.
Fails to identify the majority
of the concepts relevant to
the question. Those concepts
that are used are misapplied.
The ordering of the concepts
is in appropriate.
Identifies some of the key
concepts, but not all o f
them, or displays an in
correct understanding of
some of the concepts
discussed. The ordering of
the concepts may be adhoc.
Identifies and utilises some of
the key concepts relevant to the
question. Uses some of the
concepts, but not always in an
appropriate context. The work is
ordered appropriately
Identifies the majority of the
key concepts relevant to the
question and uses them in an
appropriate context. Orders and
structures them in a logical
sequence
Identifies all of the key concepts
relevant to the question and uses
them in an appropriate context.
The material is structured to
show significant understanding
of the key issues.
Depth of understanding and
extent of critical evaluation
(including evidence of wider
reading)
The student has failed to address
the question set or appears to
have answered a different
question to that set. There is no
evidence of any reading. No key
issues identified.
There is no evaluation of the
validity of the sources used
or the work is based on one
key source. Inappropriate
sources are used
extensively. There is no
evidence of appropriate
wider reading. No reflection
on key issues.
There is some evaluation of
the materials used in the
work. The work is based on
a limited number of
appropriate sources.
Little reflection on key
issues.
Good evaluation of materials
used, with discernment obvious
as to key sources. The work is
based on a number of
appropriate sources. Some
reflection on key issues.
Good evaluation of all
key/important sources materials
used. The work is based on a
wide range of appropriate
sources. Good reflection on key
issues.
The work is set in a context
where wider reading and
appreciation of the context is
obvious. The material included
is relevant to the topic and
appropriate in addressing the
key issues identified in the
assignment
Evidence of appropriate analysis The student fails to draw any
relationships from the material
used or the student is incorrect
in the relationships that they
draw.
The student draws one or
two basic relationships from
the material used, but then
subsequently misapply these
concepts.
The student draws one or
two basic relationships from
the material used, but fails
to identify other important
relationships. There may be
some evidence they have not
clearly understood all of the
material they have presented
The student draws some limited
relationships from the material
used. There might be minor
issues where the student is
incorrect in the assertions that
they make, but overall they
demonstrate appropriate
analysis.
The student starts to
demonstrate they understand the
key relationships from the
material used. There are no
substantive errors in their
analysis.
All the key connections are
drawn between materials from
different sources. The student
makes no substantive errors in
their analysis and reflects upon
the key issues identified in their
analysis.
Ability to synthesise relevant
material from a range of sources
The student fails to use any
appropriate sources. There is
extensive repetition of notes
given out in class.
The student uses just a few
non-academic sources of
information or the material
used is inappropriate for UG
level study. They quote
verbatim extensively from
one or two sources. They
use quotations incorrectly to
support an argument.
The student uses a few
sources of information or
the material used is
inappropriate for UG level
study. Extensive verbatim
quotes are used as a
replacement for the students
own work.
The student may be limited in
their use of academic sources
such as journals and books, but
there is evidence that they have
attempted to access a range of
sources including non-academic
ones.
The student has accessed a
range of academic sources such
as journals and books, and also
appropriate non-academic ones.
Verbatim quotes are used to
enhance the arguments being
developed rather than as a
replacement for the students
own work.
The student has accessed a wide
range of appropriate sources.
They make reference to a wide
range of material in their work.
Verbatim quotes are used from a
range of sources to illustrate and
support the arguments being
developed, but without
becoming a substitute for the
students own work.
Structure and clarity of
presentation.
The work has no coherent
structure. The work is littered
with spelling and typographical
errors. Very poor use of English.
Where appropriate tables/graphs
are not used. Referencing is
poor or non-existent.
The work is poorly
organised, and structured.
There are many spelling and
typographical errors. Poor
use of English. Where
appropriate tables/graphs are
not used. Referencing is
patchy and incomplete.
The work is poorly
structured. There are
spelling and typographical
errors. Poor use of English.
Where appropriate
tables/graphs are not used
appropriately. Some of the
referencing is incomplete
The work has a clear structure
and generally a logical
progression. Occasional
typographical and spelling
errors. Some use of
tables/graphs is made where
appropriate.
The work has overall a coherent
structure and a clear and logical
progression. Very few
typographical and spelling
errors. Good use of
tables/graphs is made where
appropriate.
The work is well structured with
clearly defined objectives that
are achieved. Typographical and
spelling errors are rare.
Excellent use of tables/graphs is
made where appropriate.